Red-phobia of the Cold War era has given way to a Green-amour,
apparently manifest in recent years in the greening of national and global
agenda. Management of greening in a country like Bangladesh is a new area, with
not much of past experience. There are two steps in policy formulation: choice
of an overall goal and selection of instruments to achieve it. The steps are
linked with political process, as selection of both the goal and the instruments
have political ramifications. The task is compounded by inter-linkages in the
conditions of land, air and water and the time lag between actions and effects.
With its physical and socio-economic parameters, Bangladesh can be said to
present a test case of sustainable development. Almost half of US population
living in a territory 65 times smaller tends to surpass the carrying capacity
both of source and sink functions of Nature. Thus the importance of a sound
policy-management framework cannot be overemphasized. Though environmental
management has become a priority issue in Bangladesh, looking into the reality
with green lens, one finds serious lacunae in both the policy and institutional
frameworks.

Environmental Policies/Laws: During the last
decade, successive governments have adopted a plethora of policies and laws.
These include the National Environment Policy (1992), National Environment
Action Plan (1992), Forest Policy (1994), Forestry Master Plan (1993-2012),
Environment Conservation Act (1995), Environment Conservation Rules (1997),
draft National Conservation Strategy (1997), Environmental Court Act (2000) etc.
Further, the National Environment Management Action Plan (NEMAP) has been
prepared with participation of grassroots people. There are the follow-ups of
NEMAP, such as the UNDP-supported Sustainable Environment Management Program (SEMP),
CIDA-supported Bangladesh Environment Management Project (BEMP), World Bank
supported Air Quality Management Project (AQMP) etc. But the state of
environment today does not match this impressive array of policies, because the
latter are not grounded on a sound process and workable instruments to realize
the intended output/impact.

The policies/plans sound mission-like, with
statements of pious objectives, rather than real directions. The policies
prescribe Dos and Don'ts, rather than giving guidance to follow through. Let us
take just one example: National Environment Policy (NEP). With 6 broad
objectives, the NEP contains 3 to 7 policy statements for each of 15 sectors of
the economy, totaling 69 sweeping statements. They are too broad in nature, with
no prioritization and no indication either of the tools or the institutional
capability needed for their implementation. There is a companion Environmental
Action Plan, also presented in a sector-wise fashion. Again with no
prioritization, EAP identifies the GoB implementing agencies for each of the 120
actions it proposes. It should have contained a logical and sequential action
plan, based on considered choices/trade-offs, against which to allocate scarce
resources human, financial and material.

Policy Instruments: Most of what the EAP proposed
is regulatory in nature. The regulatory regime, with almost 200 laws, has
bearing on the environment, both direct and indirect. The ECA is a detailed
instrument of control and regulation. But standards and penalties often are not
enforceable, efficient and effective in most cases. Reality in Bangladesh speaks
for itself! Industrial world and even many developing countries now apply more
of economic and social instruments for sustainable environment management (SEM).
Market-based instruments like user fees/taxes, subsidies, deposit-refund scheme
or emissions trading (ET) create competition for reduction of
pollution/degradation level through internalizing the externalities, giving the
right signals for the production/consumption processes. Based on the
"polluter pays principle," many countries have successfully introduced
green/carbon taxes. Our last budget contains some incentives/tax provisions
encouraging/discouraging some imports. One should expect the coming budget will
further this process.

Social Instruments are stakeholder consultation,
community-based resource management and social incentives, censure etc. In
Bangladesh policies/laws are drafted by ministries, vetted by Cabinet and
stamped by Parliament. There is hardly any substantive debate yet on environment
in Parliament. But policy-making is a political process entailing costs and
politicians are in a better position to distribute costs/benefits among
electorates. Public inputs beyond Parliament into policy-making are not yet a
substantive phenomenon. Going to the yet-to-be-operational environmental courts
for litigation should be taken as the last resort in a fractious polity like
Bangladesh. Further, public disclosure through media of firms' environmental
performance based on Rating has proved highly successful in Indonesia and
elsewhere. This instrument rests on reputational incentives. Experience shows
that pioneer green companies in the North already reap better dividends than the
laggards. This tool can be applied to firms and GoB agencies to induce
behavioral change. In like manner, the system of public recognition to tree
growers can be extended to other sectors, such as agriculture, industries,
education/advocacy, etc.

With no alternatives available, the poor are hard
on the environment, so cogently argued in Our Common Future. Neither regulation
nor taxes reach them, since 'folk-ways' always overpower 'law-ways.' Therefore,
the key to controlling harmful activities in the traditional sector is to
provide economic alternatives/incentives to communities to protect their
immediate environment. Only then will the government-imposed penalties have any
effect, because peer pressure from community leaders is more effective than from
the government. The model of joint forest management (JFM) in West Bengal,
initiated in the early 1970s by Dr. Ajit Banerjee, a forester, is a case in
point. With a higher population density than in Bangladesh, JFM based on the
principle of "care and share" has proved highly successful in
regenerating natural forests. The care is based on group responsibility and
social fencing. In contrast, with half the population density in the 1960s,
forests there were severely degraded. JFM, highly acclaimed by the World Bank,
has been widely replicated across India and beyond. Thus, it is not population
pressure, but erosion of customary rights of the poor due to statization/privatization
of natural resources that explains the problem.

In Bangladesh, community participation in
resource protection has been accepted as a management tool at the policy level.
But the statements lack clarity and direction, and are full of ambiguities. For
example, the Forest Policy states the need of establishing a triangular
partnership among the Forest Department (FD), the people and NGOs, but how the
partnership will function is not explained. The result was an unhappy marriage
between the FD and Proshika in Tangail in the mid-90s. The Project Proforma of
Participatory Forestry (PF) in the Sal Forest Belt stipulates yearly-renewable
lease with the participants, but in a long-gestation activity like forestry,
one-year agreement with no renewal for years is ludicrous! In no way it ensures
security of tree tenure, key to success in PF. It is yet to be appreciated that
in poor areas protection by foresters warrants more of investment of their
time/resources beyond forests, into the survival needs of fringe communities. In
Thailand or the Philippines, communities are given forest leases for 25 years,
with provision of renewal. It may be noted that Bangladesh have the third
highest deforestation rate in the world, after Haiti and Jamaica. This fact
alone should engender a policy of inclusion, not exclusion as in custodial
management.

Discussion on community rights/management
deserves a reference to the Hill Tracts. Intensification both of ethnic violence
and environmental stress there is largely the result of conflicts between
communal systems of resource management and government conception of property
rights. Age-old values coupled with restricted private property rights of
tribals set in the CHT Manual of 1900 and SATA of 1950 constrained their
schooling in individualism and private property culture. Cultural relativity
operates not only in defining what constitutes a resource, but also in defining
what constitutes a regime of resource management. Any functioning bundle of
property rights must possess a moral grounding in the communities'
socio-cultural milieu. Therefore, any success in the Peace Accord is likely to
depend, more than anything, on devising appropriate locale-specific models of
resource management.

Conflicts in Sectoral Policies and Lack of
Coordination: Conflicting policies are legion. Sectoral policies for
agriculture, forest, fisheries and livestock have recommended introduction of
alien species without considering its harmful impact on endemic species and
ecosystems. For example, a number of alien fish species released in the past
into closed water fisheries, found their way into open water habitats, posing
serious threats to native species. The Fisheries Policy provides for export of
turtles and other species, contradicting NEP. Emphasis of Agriculture Policy
1999 mostly on rice, wheat and maize is not facilitative to conserving the crop
diversity. While NEP discourages use of chemical fertilizers, the Agri-policy
focus on intensive method using agro-chemicals will have a negative impact on
environment.

As environmental issues are crosscutting, there
are overlapping jurisdictions and conflicting mandates among agencies. For
example, about a dozen ministries and two dozen agencies are concerned with land
management. Conservation of fisheries suffers because of ownership conflicts
between the Ministry of Land, which owns over 10,000 jalmahals (wetlands), while
the Ministry of Fisheries looks after the management of fisheries. Despite a
directive from the Prime Minister, the Fisheries Ministry is yet to get hold of
some wetlands for their conservation and sustainable management. The MoL used to
lease them to private parties who exploited them unsustainably for profits.
Thus, lack of consistency in sectoral policies and coordination seriously
hampers environment management. This problem was looked into by the now-stalled
SEMP Component of Policy and Legislation, implemented by the World Bank. As one
of the tasks, it initiated establishing Environment Cells (EC) among 17 line
ministries. Given proper support, the full-blooded ECs could avoid overlapping,
policy conflicts, establish coordination and marry environment and development.

Institutional Structure, Manpower and Budget:
Existing structure suffers from inactivity, manpower and budgetary constraints.
The National Environment Council, headed by Prime Minister and the EC of NEC
headed by Minister of Environment and Forest remain virtually non-functional.
This deprives the green agenda of political blessings from the top. With a
gigantic task of ensuring a clean environment, the manpower and budgetary
provisions of MoEF and DoE (together about 50 officers/technical hands and Tk.3
cr/yr) are peanuts compared to sectoral ministries. The MoEF is manned mainly by
admn cadres and the problem is accentuated by their frequent transfer, even
after getting environmental training. The current level at 5% of public
expenditure on all environment-related activities is quite low. This is even
discriminatory, as majority of people depends on natural resources for their
livelihood, income and employment.

There is a Planning Cell in MoEF, which is more
short of required personnel. The Cell should be upgraded as Policy Planning
Cell, with recruitment of experts from multidisciplinary background, who are
able to coordinate and lead the ECs of line ministries. As one of the oldest
agency, FD has the personnel strength, which in partnership with fringe
community should be able to protect and enhance state forests. No addition of
staff will do better policing unless the management strategy is changed. The
long-needed Division of Social Forestry is not yet in place. A Department of
Conservation or at least a Division within the FD should be created, since the
issues are crosscutting and demand new policies/laws.

Environmental Diplomacy: Poverty is and should be
articulated as the number one environmental problem. There are growing
opportunities for vulnerable countries like Bangladesh if negotiations can be
pursued forcefully. It is a technical and knowledge-intensive affair and
delegations should be formed accordingly. But some problems persist, entailing
the risk of presenting Bangladesh as a permanent novice in such
negotiations. Delegation members are selected not with appropriate background,
no continuity in participation and no institutional expertise/memory develops
over time. The problem can partially be addressed by including an Expert in
senior level delegations. Many developing countries do so. This will strengthen
the fledgling bridge between executive power and expertise in Bangladesh. The
little costs involved for an Expert will certainly be compensated many times
over by earning lead role and project support from donors. At a time of sharply
declining ODA, competition for scarce resources is intense. Compared to
countries even in South Asia, Bangladesh lags far behind in tapping external
resources for environmental protection.

Finally, the GOB can never do the job alone
without a partnership with civil society and private sector. The latter as the
engine of growth should also play avante guard in the greening process. Civil
society is in a better position to develop environmental constituencies among
the citizens and politicians. Most of the issues raised above were looked into
by the UNDP-supported $26mn SEMP with its 26 components covering
policy/legislation, community-based resource/ environmental management,
advocacy/awareness and environmental education. Given proper implementation,
SEMP - a partnership of GOB, civil society and private sector - shall make a
real contribution to capacity building at national, local and community levels.
One hopes this Grant-based Program be put back on track soon.